Walton v. Maguire
This text of 17 Cal. 92 (Walton v. Maguire) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Baldwin, J. concurring.
The question in this case relates to the propriety of an order refusing a new trial, and the ground chiefly relied upon for a reversal is the insufficiency of the evidence to justify the decision. In making the order, the Court acted in the exercise of a sound legal discretion, and upon the evidence embodied in the record we cannot undertake to say that this discretion ivas abused. Our interference, under the circumstances, would be a departure from the rule upon which we have always acted in such cases.
There is nothing in the other point made; and the judgment is therefore affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
17 Cal. 92, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/walton-v-maguire-cal-1860.